A lot of people take this attitude, but I follow the dangerous course of reading my
adversaries and taking them seriously. I have read Sommers (I have in fact met her)
and I think she is an idiot. But I also read Hayek and Mises, and, as you all know, I
have learned from them. This just for starters. Among the writers on Marx I most
respect is Scott Arnold, a right winger. _Smart_ and respectful enemies are our best
critics; we owe it to ourselves to listen to them carefully. --jks
In a message dated Wed, 2 Aug 2000 2:27:58 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Yoshie Furuhashi
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
<< Doug wrote:
>Charles Brown wrote, responding to Yoshie:
>
>>I don't think it's a matter of whether "uncertainty" &
>>"self-questioning" are good things. The point is that we are
>>basically incapable of self-criticism.
>>
>>__________
>>
>>CB: We are dependent upon others for criticism. This is one of the
>>"advantages" of the human individual being a social individual.
>>Through this socialality, we have some of the power of seeing
>>ourselves as others see us, including criticizing us, seeing our
>>blinds spots.
>
>The more I think about this, the more I wonder: if we are basically
>incapable of self-criticism, does that counsel extreme certainty or
>extreme uncertainty?
Neither. It's just a fact of the matter.
You don't take criticism from Christina Hoff Sommers as to the state
of feminism (I don't know if you even read her, aside from Katha,
Laura, and others' criticisms of her), but you are certain that you
are right & she's wrong.
We don't live in a world where everything is uncertain, and only in a
world of many certainties can we speak of uncertainties.
Yoshie
>>
